1. Technical Field
The present inventions relate to dream inducement and, more particularly, relate to a method and electrical apparatus for inducing lucid dreaming.
2. Description of the Related Art
A lucid dream is one in which the dreamer obtains conscious awareness while still remaining in the dream. While we are all familiar with ordinary non-lucid dreams, the notion of conscious awareness within ones dream-space is quite foreign to most. Lucid dreaming is better understood and leveraged in Eastern culture. For example, the use of lucid dreams for personal or spiritual development has been leveraged for thousands of years in Buddhist practice. In the West, most people are too busy to apply the mental training techniques required to achieve this state naturally.
Western researchers have tried to develop technological solutions in one sense or another to solve the challenge of having lucid dreams on demand. Secondary goals of such technology driven solutions have included maximizing dream vividness, recall, control or overall cognitive ability while in the dream.
The possible applications of lucid dreaming are limitless. Not surprisingly, entertainment seems to be the most common application of lucid dreaming. This might include flying like a bird, meeting up with long lost friends or even romantic fantasies. More esoteric and well known lucid dream tasks include the elimination of recurrent nightmares, practicing physical tasks and having that practice within your dream-space impact your actual wakeful performance, elimination of phobias, insights into your subconscious by engaging in conversation with dream characters and pursuing creative endeavors such as writing music or poetry under this slightly altered state of awareness.
Given the limitless number of applications for lucid dreaming, it is desired to identify a safe and predictable method for inducing lucid dreams. While lucid dream frequency is desired, it is also important to recognize that the recovery of full cognitive ability within the dream is crucial if some of the aforementioned goals are to be implemented by the dreamer.
It is known in the art that the quality of lucid dreams can vary greatly. Perhaps the single largest challenge once lucidity is obtained is the application of full cognitive ability. Lucid dreamers will often claim they were lucid, but that their cognitive ability was a fraction of what they expect when they are awake. Ramifications of this include poor ability to remember or implement goals, or an inability to remember the details of the dream once the dreamer awakens.
An early attempt at a technological solution to lucid dreaming was the concept of a lucid dream mask by LaBerge, et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,507,716. This was essentially a facial mask worn during a lucid dream attempt. The mask has a compartment for a printed circuit board that contains a motion detector which aligns to the position of an eye. The circuit board was designed to detect rapid eye movement (REM). Upon this detection, the mask sent light or sound cues to the dreamer. These cues may manifest in the dream as light or sound anomalies. The dreamer had to train to use these cues in order to recognize that they are dreaming. The problems with these devices were several. First, most people find it difficult to sleep with a cumbersome mask strapped to their face. Second, the settings are very tricky. A little too much motion detection sensitivity and the cues can wake the dreamer before the dream is stable. Too little and the mask doesn't detect and deliver cues. Similar problems can be said of the brightness and sound settings. The worst part is that the brain becomes accustomed to this phenomenon and tends to either tune it out or wake upon light or sound stimulus. Other peculiarities can creep in such as the lucid dreamer feeling like the mask is on them during the dream leaving them unable to see. A review of various internet lucid dream sites will find few people claiming phenomenal success with such devices.
A more recent development in lucid dream induction was that provided by LaBerge in US Patent Application Publication No. 20040266659. In this application, LaBerge identified several classes of drugs that can positively impact dream lucidity and cognitive ability of the dreamer. The main focus of this development was the class of drugs known as acetylcholine esterase inhibitors. Fundamentally, these are drugs that slow the breakdown of acetylcholine in the brain. Commercial usage of drugs such as Galantamine or Huperzine-A for lucid dream induction resulted from this disclosure by LaBerge. While this class of drugs does seem to be safe and reasonably effective at lucid dream induction, they also exhibit a number of limitations. Insomnia is a common consequence of using these drugs. Not only can this leave the subject sleepy the next day, it eliminates any possibility of lucid dreaming. Since these drugs bias acetylcholine (AcH) levels, they tend to create a chemical balance that favors REM sleep over delta wave and other physically recuperative cycles of sleep. Again, this can often leave the subject run down and sleepy the next day due to a lack of recuperative sleep the prior evening. A noticeable tolerance to acetylcholine esterase inhibitors has also been exhibited and is a common problem known to those skilled in the art. A dose that used to cause a positive effect every 4th day (generally accepted as the minimal inter-use window for galantamine), can soon only realizes a positive effect once per week. Even once a week can become a challenge for users who have leveraged a drug like galantamine for a year or more. Discussion of this tolerance issue is well documented on internet based lucid dream bulletin boards. Even with the use of these AcH boosting drugs, lucid dreamers often report unsatisfactory cognitive ability and critical thinking recovery once lucid. The last and final challenge is the gastro-intestinal distress and intolerance some people realize.
Another approach to the generalized modification of brain state activity was cranial electrical stimulation (CES). Cranial electrical stimulation was researched and developed in the Soviet Union in the 1950's. At the time this application was termed “electro-sleep” because studies focused mostly on resolution of insomnia in human subjects. By the 1960's a significant amount of private and university level research was underway in the United States for both animal and human subjects. The typical applications explored during this time were reduction of pain, anxiety, depression and elimination of insomnia.
Cranial electrical stimulation differs from several other electrical or magnetic stimuli such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Cranial electrical stimulation involves the delivery of a small micro current across the brain. Typically, this is delivered via electrodes clipped to the ear lobes. The currents involved are quite small, on the order of 50 μA-5 mA. Research has demonstrated that the preferred waveforms for cranial electrical stimulation applications are square or rectilinear biphasic signals with zero mean voltage delivered over time. These types of biphasic signals are easily designed and implemented to have equal positive and negative portions to eliminate the possibility of elecrolysis of the blood. This positive/negative behavior of the signal better replicates the response of nerve impulses that are characterized by having one polarity upon application of pressure and a potential of equal but opposite polarity upon release of pressure. Pulse widths of 0.1 to 2.0 seconds are commonly used and the envelope of the signal typically used for traditional applications is designed to be periodic at a rate of 0.5-3.0 Hz. It is also recognized by those skilled in the art that dynamic modification of the signal is often preferred as the brain can otherwise develop a tolerance to a repetitive electrical stimulus and slowly become unresponsive to this external signal. Methods to dynamically modify the signal include but are not limited to using on/off pulses, changing the envelope frequency over time, using a low frequency envelope to modulate a higher frequency carrier wave, changing the time domain format of the periodic signal, making changes in signal magnitude, etc.
Other cited methods are different than cranial electrical stimulation. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for example is typically applied to injured or uncomfortable muscles and/or soft tissue areas. TENS is typically delivered in the 50-200 Hz range at much higher currents. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) differs from cranial electrical stimulation in the stimulus itself. TMS is a magnetic alteration of brain response as opposed to an electrical stimulus.
While decades of research have been implemented in this area, very little has actually been quantified in terms of how cranial electrical stimulation actually works. Most data and conclusions are empirical in nature. Blind or double blind studies routinely prove that low frequency cranial electrical stimulation in the 0.5-3.0 Hz range has positive effects in the aforementioned diseases and discomforts. Certainly it is well understood via electroencephalogram (EEG) measurements of patients before and after cranial electrical stimulation treatment that cranial electrical stimulation tends to eliminate irregular or abnormal electro chemical activity especially in the alpha range of 8-12 Hz. However the precise mechanism that drives this response is poorly understood. Most research cites the generic theory that cranial electrical stimulation helps to drive neurotransmitter balance back to a normal homeostasis. Cranial electrical stimulation regiments typically follow the model of 30 minutes of treatment per day for 5-15 days. Depending on the ailment and individual, positive response is often subjectively perceived for anywhere from 1 week to 2 years.